Literature DB >> 33417712

Genomic selection in American mink (Neovison vison) using a SSGBLUP model for size and quality traits graded on live mink.

Trine M Villumsen1, Guosheng Su, Bernt Guldbrandtsen1, Torben Asp1, Mogens S Lund1.   

Abstract

Genomic selection relies on single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP), which are often collected using medium-density SNP arrays. In mink, no such array is available; instead, genotyping by sequencing (GBS) can be used to generate marker information. Here, we evaluated the effect of genomic selection for mink using GBS. We compared the estimated breeding values (EBV) from single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction models (SSGBLUP) to the EBV from ordinary pedigree-based BLUP models. We analyzed seven size and quality traits from the live grading of brown mink. The phenotype data consisted of ~20,600 records for the seven traits from the mink born between 2013 and 2016. Genotype data included 2,103 mink born between 2010 and 2014, mostly breeding animals. In total, 28,336 SNP markers from 391 scaffolds were available for genomic prediction. The pedigree file included 29,212 mink. The predictive ability was assessed by the correlation (r) between progeny trait deviation (PTD) and EBV, and the regression of PTD on EBV, using 5-fold cross-validation. For each fold, 1/5 of animals born in 2014 formed the validation set. For all traits, the SSGBLUP model resulted in higher accuracies than the BLUP model. The average increase in accuracy was 15 % (between 3 % for fur clarity and 28 % for body weight). For three traits (body weight, silky appearance of under wool and guard hair thickness), the difference in r between the two models was significant (P < 0.05). For all traits, the regression slopes of PTD on EBV from SSGBLUP models were closer to 1 than regression slopes from BLUP models, indicating SSGBLUP models resulted in less bias of EBV for selection candidates than the BLUP models. However, the regression coefficients did not differ significantly. In conclusion, the SSGBLUP model is superior to conventional BLUP model in accurate selection of superior animals, and thus it would increases genetic gain in a selective breeding program. In addition, this study shows that GBS data work well in genomic prediction in mink, demonstrating the potential of GBS for genomic selection in livestock species.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.

Keywords:  zzm321990 Neovison visonzzm321990 ; genomic selection; genotyping-by-sequencing; live quality traits

Year:  2021        PMID: 33417712     DOI: 10.1093/jas/skab003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  25 in total

1.  Genomic prediction for Nordic Red Cattle using one-step and selection index blending.

Authors:  G Su; P Madsen; U S Nielsen; E A Mäntysaari; G P Aamand; O F Christensen; M S Lund
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.034

2.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.

Authors:  P M VanRaden
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.034

3.  Improving genetic evaluation of litter size and piglet mortality for both genotyped and nongenotyped individuals using a single-step method.

Authors:  X Guo; O F Christensen; T Ostersen; Y Wang; M S Lund; G Su
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Application of single-step genomic evaluation for crossbred performance in pig.

Authors:  T Xiang; B Nielsen; G Su; A Legarra; O F Christensen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Development of high-density genetic maps for barley and wheat using a novel two-enzyme genotyping-by-sequencing approach.

Authors:  Jesse A Poland; Patrick J Brown; Mark E Sorrells; Jean-Luc Jannink
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Response and inbreeding from a genomic selection experiment in layer chickens.

Authors:  Anna Wolc; Honghua H Zhao; Jesus Arango; Petek Settar; Janet E Fulton; Neil P O'Sullivan; Rudolf Preisinger; Chris Stricker; David Habier; Rohan L Fernando; Dorian J Garrick; Susan J Lamont; Jack C M Dekkers
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Potential of genotyping-by-sequencing for genomic selection in livestock populations.

Authors:  Gregor Gorjanc; Matthew A Cleveland; Ross D Houston; John M Hickey
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-03-01       Impact factor: 4.297

8.  SNP markers associated with body size and pelt length in American mink (Neovison vison).

Authors:  Zexi Cai; Trine Michelle Villumsen; Torben Asp; Bernt Guldbrandtsen; Goutam Sahana; Mogens Sandø Lund
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 2.797

9.  Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform.

Authors:  Heng Li; Richard Durbin
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-05-18       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 10.  Applications of genotyping by sequencing in aquaculture breeding and genetics.

Authors:  Diego Robledo; Christos Palaiokostas; Luca Bargelloni; Paulino Martínez; Ross Houston
Journal:  Rev Aquac       Date:  2017-02-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.